CYBERPSYCHOLOGY, BEHAVIOR, AND SOCIAL NETWORKING

Volume X, Number X, 2018

Mary Ann Liebert, Inc.
DOI: 10.1089/cyber.2017.29099.gri

Neuroscience of Virtual Reality:

From Virtual Exposure to Embodied Medicine

Giuseppe Riva, PhD,1,2 Brenda K. Wiederhold, PhD, MBA, BCB, BCN,3,4 and Fabrizia Mantovani, PhD5

Abstract

Is virtual reality (VR) already a reality in behavioral health? To answer this question, a meta-review was
conducted to assess the meta-analyses and systematic and narrative reviews published in this field in the last
twenty-two months. Twenty-five different articles demonstrated the clinical potential of this technology in both
the diagnosis and the treatment of mental health disorders: VR compares favorably to existing treatments in
anxiety disorders, eating and weight disorders, and pain management, with long-term effects that generalize to
the real world. But why is VR so effective? Here, the following answer is suggested: VR shares with the brain
the same basic mechanism: embodied simulations. According to neuroscience, to regulate and control the body
in the world effectively, the brain creates an embodied simulation of the body in the world used to represent and
predict actions, concepts, and emotions. VR works in a similar way: the VR experience tries to predict the
sensory consequences of an individual’s movements, providing to him/her the same scene he/she will see in the
real world. To achieve this, the VR system, like the brain, maintains a model (simulation) of the body and the
space around it. If the presence in the body is the outcome of different embodied simulations, concepts are
embodied simulations, and VR is an embodied technology, this suggests a new clinical approach discussed in
this article: the possibility of altering the experience of the body and facilitating cognitive modeling/change by
designing targeted virtual environments able to simulate both the external and the internal world/body.

Virtual Reality in Behavioral Health: A Meta-Review contribution in many different areas, from anxiety and eating
disorders to psychosis and addiction.

T his special issue presented and discussed different

virtual reality (VR) applications for behavioral health. But
is VR already a reality in behavioral health? To answer this
question, a meta-review was conducted to assess the meta-
analyses and systematic and narrative reviews (see Fig. 1 for
the methodology) published in this field in the last 22 months.
Twenty-five different articles1–25 (see Table 1 for the ar-
ticles’ list and a summary of their conclusions) demonstrated
the clinical potential of this technology in both the diagno-
sis and the treatment of mental health disorders. Nine arti-
cles1,2,6,9,14,15,19,18,22 reviewed the available literature on the
effectiveness of VR in psychiatric/mental health treatment.
All of the articles suggest that VR is suitable for the treat-
ment of mental health problems and could make an important
The most common use of VR in behavioral health is for
exposure therapy (VR exposure [VRE]). VRE is similar to
classic exposure therapy10,16,26—the patient is exposed to a
graded exposure hierarchy—with the only difference being
that VR is substituted for other exposure techniques (e.g.,
in vivo or imaginal exposure). In the treatment of complex
anxiety disorders, the use of VRE is often combined with
other techniques such as breathing or relaxation exercises,27
attentional and autonomic control training,28 biofeedback,29,30
and/or cognitive restructuring.31
Five articles,5,8,10 including a meta-analysis,11,16 spe-
cifically explored the use of VRE in the treatment of anx-
iety disorders. The available data show that VR is able to
reduce anxiety symptoms significantly in different anxiety

1
Applied Technology for Neuro-Psychology Lab, IRCCS Istituto Auxologico Italiano, Milan, Italy.
2
Department of Psychology, Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore, Milan, Italy.
3
Virtual Reality Medical Center, La Jolla, California.
4
Virtual Reality Medical Institute, Brussels, Belgium.
5
Department of Human Sciences for Education, Università degli Studi di Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.
ª Giuseppe Riva et al. 2018; Published by Mary Ann Liebert, Inc. This Open Access article is distributed under the terms of the Creative
Commons License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any
medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

1
2 RIVA ET AL.

Articles identified through database

searching (N = 1,220) Number of duplicates (N = 345)

Articles screened after duplicates Articles not meeting inclusion

removed (N = 875) criteria (N = 848)

Reasons for exclusion: review had

Full-text articles assessed for a limited focus on virtual reality
eligibility (N = 27) (N = 2)

Studies included in qualitative

synthesis (N = 25)

FIG. 1. Meta-review methodology. Using the Google Scholar and Scopus databases, a systematic search was conducted to
identify reviews (both systematic and narrative) and meta-analyses that reported on the effects of virtual reality (VR) in the
assessment and treatment in behavioral health: anxiety disorders, pain management, schizophrenia spectrum disorders,
eating and weight disorders, autism spectrum disorders, personality disorders, and substance use disorders. Guidelines for
conducting a systematic review discussed by Uman162 were followed. The ‘‘free-form’’ question was as follows: ‘‘Do
virtual environments perform equal-to-or-better-than traditional modalities in behavioral health?’’ The outcome of interest
was reviews and meta-analyses answering this question in any area of behavioral health. The following search terms were
used: ((‘‘Virtual Reality’’ AND (‘‘Review’’ OR ‘‘Meta-analysis’’ OR ‘‘metaanalysis’’)) AND (‘‘anxiety’’ OR ‘‘phobia’’ OR
‘‘fear’’ OR ‘‘stress’’ OR ‘‘pain’’ OR ‘‘schizophrenia’’ OR ‘‘psychosis’’ OR ‘‘obesity’’ OR ‘‘eating disorders’’ OR ‘‘bu-
limia’’ OR ‘‘binge eating’’ OR ‘‘anorexia’’, OR ‘‘autism’’ OR ‘‘Asperger’’ OR ‘‘substance’’ OR ‘‘drug’’ OR ‘‘nicotine’’
OR ‘‘cocaine’’ OR ‘‘opioids’’). The search targeted articles published between November 2, 2016, and August 1, 2018.
Inclusion criteria included (a) reviews or meta-analyses, (b) English language journals, and (c) peer-reviewed journals.
Exclusion criteria included (a) articles related to the use of VR in surgery or in physical and cognitive rehabilitation; and (b)
articles lacking basic information about the selection of the discussed articles. The meta-review flow diagram is shown.

disorders: phobias,32 post-traumatic stress disorders,33 panic
disorder and agoraphobia,34 social anxiety disorders,35 psy-
chological stress,36 and generalized anxiety disorders.37
The clinical outcome is generally superior to waitlist con-
trol conditions and comparable to in vivo exposure-based
interventions.
A second group of five articles3,12,13,17,23 evaluated the
efficacy of VR in the treatment of eating and weight disor-
ders. In this field, VR is used in two different ways.38 First,
VR cue exposure to critical stimuli (e.g., food or human
bodies) allows both a reduction in the level of anxiety eli-
cited by them and disruption of the reconsolidation of
negative memories.39,40 Second, VR is used to facilitate the
update of existing body representations.41,42 According to a
recent theory,43–47 eating and weight disorders may be the
outcome of a broader impairment in multisensory body in-
tegration that locks the individuals to an old memory of the
body.48 In this view, even if the subject is able to lose weight
after a diet, the multisensory impairment does not allow
her/him to experience the new body and reduce the level of
body dissatisfaction. VR allows a wrong representation
of the body to be updated through two different strategies.
In the first—‘‘reference frame shifting’’49,50—the subject re-
experiences in VR a negative situation related to the body
(e.g., teasing) in both the first and third person (e.g., seeing and
supporting her/his avatar in the VR world). In the second—
‘‘body swapping’’51,52—VR is used to induce the illusory
feeling of ownership of a virtual body with a different shape
and/or size. Even if the number of available controlled stud-
ies is less than for anxiety disorders, the field has rapidly
evolved.17 Specifically, four different randomized controlled
trials—one with eating disorders,53 one with morbid obesity,54
one with binge-eating,55 and one with binge-eating and
bulimia56—have shown after 6-month and 12-month follow-
ups that VR had a higher efficacy than the gold standard in the
field, that is, cognitive–behavioral therapy.
A third group of three articles20,21,24 analyzed the use of VR
in pediatric psychology, with a specific focus on VR applica-
tions for the assessment of children suspected of having autism
spectrum disorder57 or other neurodevelopmental disorders58,59
(e.g., attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder). In this field, dif-
ferent from the previous ones, the level of clinical evidence
available is still low, even if the existing data suggest moderate
evidence about the effectiveness of VR-based treatments.24 In
relation to this topic, another article specifically explored the
use of VR for the assessment of psychiatric disorders,4 finding
that virtual worlds are able to induce and assess psychiatric
symptoms simultaneously, with significant correlations be-
tween VR measures and traditional diagnostic tools. Moreover,
VR is also effective in assessing cue reactivity60: its use is able
to increase subjective craving in smokers,61,62 alcohol drink-
ers,63 eaters,64 and cocaine-dependent individuals.65
 Table 1. Meta-Analyses and Systematic and Narrative Reviews Published in the Last 12 Months Related
to the Use of Virtual Reality in the Diagnosis and Treatment of Mental Health Disorders
Review type Article
Systematic Riva G, Baños RM, Botella C, et al.
meta-review Transforming experience: the potential of
augmented reality and virtual reality for
enhancing personal and clinical change.
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2016; 7:164.1
Systematic review (mental Freeman D, Reeve S, Robinson A, et al.
health) Virtual reality in the assessment,
understanding, and treatment of mental
health disorders. Psychological Medicine
2017; 47:2393–2400.2
Reply to the above systematic Riva G. Letter to the editor: virtual reality in
review (eating and weight the treatment of eating and weight
disorders) disorders. Psychological Medicine 2017;
47:2567–2568.3
Narrative review (mental Mishkind MC, Norr AM, Katz AC, et al.
health therapy) Review of virtual reality treatment in
psychiatry: evidence versus current
diffusion and use. Current Psychiatry
Included studies Conclusions (from the articles)
27 systematic ‘‘The available data support the use of this technology in the treatment
reviews and of anxiety disorders, pain management, obesity and eating disorders,
meta-analyses and stress-related disorders. But still, there is no clear good quality
evidence for or against using VR for the treatment of depression and
schizophrenia.’’
285 studies ‘‘VR environments can elicit psychiatric symptoms, manipulation of VR
can inform the understanding of disorders, and simpler psychological
treatments can be successfully administered in VR.
The most established finding is that VR exposure-based treatments can
reduce anxiety disorders, but there are numerous research and
treatment avenues of promise.’’
3 studies ‘‘Three different RCTs have shown at 1-year follow-up that VR for
eating and weight disorders has a higher efficacy than the gold
standard in the field, i.e. cognitive–behavioral therapy (CBT).’’
Not reported ‘‘More research is needed before VRE may be considered standard of
care in some areas; however, for patients with PTSD or anxiety, and
especially patients not responding or not willing to participate in
traditional therapy, the use of VRE may be considered as an option.

3
Systematic review (mental
health assessment)
Narrative review (anxiety
disorders)
Systematic review (mental
health)
Reports 2017; 19:80.19
van Bennekom MJ, de Koning PP, Denys D.
Virtual reality objectifies the diagnosis of
psychiatric disorders: a literature review.
Frontiers in Psychiatry 2017; 8:163.4
Lindner P, Miloff A, Hamilton W, et al.
Creating state of the art, next-generation
virtual reality exposure therapies for
anxiety disorders using consumer
hardware platforms: design considerations
and future directions. Cognitive Behaviour
Therapy 2017; 46:404–420.5
Massetti T, Crocetta TB, Silva TDD, et al.
Application and outcomes of therapy
combining transcranial direct current
stimulation and virtual reality: a
systematic review. Disability &
Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology
2017; 12:551–559.6
The use of VR for other conditions such as chronic pain,
rehabilitation, and addictions also shows clinical promise.’’
39 studies ‘‘Nearly all VR environments studied were able to simultaneously
provoke and measure psychiatric symptoms. Furthermore, in 14
studies, significant correlations were found between VR measures and
traditional diagnostic measures. Relatively small clinical sample sizes
were used, impeding definite conclusions.’’
Not reported ‘‘While having been researched for decades and proven efficacious for
the treatment of anxiety disorders, the pending and ongoing release of
consumer-targeted VR hardware platforms signals an opportune time
to develop the next generation of VR exposure therapies for
widespread dissemination as self-help applications and integration
into regular health care settings.’’
11 studies ‘‘The use of tDCS combined with VR showed positive results in both
healthy and impaired patients including pain management. Future
studies with larger sample sizes and homogeneous participants are
required to confirm the benefits of tDCS and VR.’’

(continued)

Review type
Systematic review (mental
health)
Systematic review and meta-
analysis (acrophobia)
Narrative review (psychosis)
Systematic reviews (phobias)
4
Narrative review (anxiety
disorders)
Meta-analysis (flight anxiety)
Narrative review (weight
disorders)
Table 1. (Continued)
Article
Jerdan SW, Grindle M, van Woerden HC,
Kamel Boulos MN. Head-Mounted Virtual
Reality and Mental Health: Critical
Review of Current Research. JMIR
Serious Games 2018; 6:e14.
Arroll B, Wallace HB, Mount V, et al.
A systematic review and meta-analysis
of treatments for acrophobia. Med J Aust
2017; 206:263–267.
Rus-Calafell M, Garety P, Sason E, et al.
Virtual reality in the assessment and
treatment of psychosis: a systematic
review of its utility, acceptability and
effectiveness. Psychological Medicine
2017 Jul 24 [Epub ahead of print].7
Botella C, Fernández-Álvarez J, Guillén V, et al.
Recent progress in virtual reality exposure
therapy for phobias: a systematic review.
Current Psychiatry Reports 2017; 19:42.8
Maples-Keller JL, Yasinski C, Manjin N,
et al. Virtual reality-enhanced extinction
of phobias and post-traumatic stress.
Neurotherapeutics 2017; 14:554–563.10
Cardosx RAI, David OA, David, DO. Virtual
reality exposure therapy in flight anxiety: a
quantitative meta-analysis. Computers in
Human Behavior 2017; 72:371–380.11
Castelnuovo G, Pietrabissa G, Manzoni GM,
et al. Cognitive behavioral therapy to aid
weight loss in obese patients: current
perspectives. Psychology Research &
Behavior Management 2017; 10:165–
173.12
Included studies Conclusions (from the articles)
82 studies ‘‘Our review demonstrated that VR is effective in provoking realistic
reactions to feared stimuli, particularly for anxiety; moreover, it
proved that the immersive nature of VR is an ideal fit for the
management of pain. However, the lack of studies surrounding
depression and stress highlight the literature gaps that still exist.’’
16 studies ‘‘A range of therapies are effective for acrophobia in the short term but
not in the long term. Many of the comparative studies showed
equivalence between therapies, but this finding may be due to a type II
statistical error. The quality of reporting was poor in most studies.’’
50 studies ‘‘Virtual reality is a promising method to be used in the assessment of
neurocognitive deficits and the study of relevant clinical symptoms.
Furthermore, preliminary findings suggest that it can be applied to the
delivery of cognitive rehabilitation, social skills training interventions
and virtual reality-assisted therapies for psychosis.’’
11 studies ‘‘VRET applications have become an effective alternative that can equal
the results of traditional treatments for phobias from an efficacy point
of view. However, they are also tools capable of enhancing the
psychological treatment field.’’
Not reported ‘‘VRE is consistent with models of extinction learning and provides
several advantages for use within exposure-based interventions.
Broadly, extant research provides support for the effectiveness of
VRE in reducing symptoms of specific phobias and PTSD, with
outcomes generally superior to waitlist controls and comparable with
traditional exposure therapy.’’
11 studies ‘‘Results pointed out significant overall efficiency of VRET in flight
anxiety at post-test and follow-up. Analysis highlighted the
superiority of VRET vs. control conditions at post-test and follow-up
and the superiority of VRET vs. classical evidence-based
interventions at post-test and follow-up.’’
Not reported ‘‘Another current and future scenario where CBT could be improved in
the management of obesity is represented by virtual reality (VR)
applications, such as the VR-enhanced CBT that is a sort of enhanced
CBT of obesity with a VR module focused on unlocking the negative
memory of the body, changing its dysfunctional behavioral correlates,
and managing negative emotional states.’’
(continued)

Review type
Narrative review (weight
disorders)
Systematic review (clinical
medicine)
Systematic review and meta-
analysis (procedural pain)
Narrative review (clinical
medicine)
5
Narrative review (mental
health)
Systematic review (eating
disorders)
Systematic review (clinical
medicine)
Table 1. (Continued)
Article
Paul L, Van Der Heiden C, Hoek HW.
Cognitive behavioral therapy and
predictors of weight loss in bariatric
surgery patients. Current Opinion in
Psychiatry 2017; 30:474–479.13
Dascal J, Reid M, Ishak WW, et al. Virtual
reality and medical inpatients: a
systematic review of randomized,
controlled trials. Innovations in Clinical
Neuroscience 2017; 14:14–21.14
Chan E, Foster S, Sambell R, Leong P.
Clinical efficacy of virtual reality for acute
procedural pain management: A
systematic review and meta-analysis.
PLoS ONE 2018; 13:e0200987.
Li L, Yu F, Shi D, et al. Application of virtual
reality technology in clinical medicine.
American Journal of Translational
Research 2017; 9:3867–3880.15
Maples-Keller JL, Bunnell BE, Kim SJ, et al.
The use of virtual reality technology in the
treatment of anxiety and other psychiatric
disorders. Harvard Review of Psychiatry
2017; 25:103–113.9
de Carvalho M, Dias T, Duchesne M, et al.
Virtual reality as a promising strategy in
the assessment and treatment of bulimia
nervosa and binge eating disorder: a
systematic review. Behavioral Sciences
2017; 7:43.17
Pourmand A, Davis S, Lee D, et al.
Emerging utility of virtual reality as a
multidisciplinary tool in clinical medicine.
Games for Health Journal 2017; 6:263–
270.18
Included studies Conclusions (from the articles)
Not reported ‘‘Although empirical evidence is still scare, results show that CBT is
effective in reducing disordered eating disorders and depression in
bariatric patients. New techniques for applying CBR by virtual reality
potentially make CBT more accessible and less costly’’
11 studies ‘‘Data from 11 eligible studies provide insight into three current medical
applications of VR technology: pain distraction, eating disorders, and
cognitive/motor rehabilitation. Overall, a majority of studies from the
past decade found VR to be efficacious, easy to use, safe, and
contributing to high patient satisfaction.’’
20 studies ‘‘VR may have a role in acutely painful procedures, however included
studies were clinically and statistically heterogenous. Further research
is required to validate findings, establish cost efficacy and optimal
clinical settings for usage. Future trials should report in accordance
with established guidelines.’’
Not reported ‘‘VR has shown to be effective in reduction of burn-induced pain and
management of pain in other situations . Virtual reality exposure therapy
and virtual reality cognitive behavior therapy have become effective
choices for patients with anxiety disorders and other phobias like fear of
flying, claustrophobia, acrophobia or generalized social phobia’’
Not reported ‘‘VR has emerged as a viable tool to help in a number of different
disorders, with the most strength of evidence for use in exposure
therapy for patients with anxiety disorders, cue exposure therapy for
patients with substance use disorders, and distraction for patients with
acute pain requiring painful procedures.’’
19 studies ‘‘Two different randomized, controlled trials have shown at one-year
follow-up that VR had a higher efficacy than the gold standard in the
field, i.e., cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT). In conclusion, based
on the current available data VR-based environments may be
considered a promising strategy for the assessment and treatment of
BN and BED.’’
45 studies ‘‘These articles provide data, which strongly support the hypothesis that
VR simulations can enhance pain management (by reducing patient
perception of pain and anxiety), can augment clinical training
curricula and physical rehabilitation protocols (through immersive
audiovisual environments), and can improve clinical assessment of
cognitive function (through improved ecological validity).’’
(continued)

Review type
Systematic review (autism)
Narrative review (pediatrics)
Systematic review (autism)
6
Systematic review (eating
disorders)
Table 1. (Continued)
Article
Duffield TC, Parsons TD, Landry A, et al.
Virtual environments as an assessment
modality with pediatric ASD populations:
a brief report. Child Neuropsychology
2017 Sep 13 [Epub ahead of print].20
Parsons TD, Riva G, Parsons S, et al. Virtual
reality in pediatric psychology. Pediatrics
2017; 140:S86–S91.21
Mesa-Gresa P, Gil-Gomez H, Lozano-Quilis
JA, Gil-Gomez JA. Effectiveness of
virtual reality for children and adolescents
with autism spectrum disorder: an
evidence-based systematic review. Sensors
(Basel) 2018; 18:pii:E2486.
Clus D, Larsen ME, Lemey C, Berrouiguet
S. The use of virtual reality in patients
with eating disorders: systematic review. J
Med Internet Res 2018; 20:e157.
Included studies Conclusions (from the articles)
5 studies ‘‘Psychometric comparisons of these tools for the neuropsychological
assessment of pediatric individuals with ASD are lacking as the
current review demonstrated, although the use of VEs. This is a
particularly important area of future research considering most
identification, and thus testing, treatment, and training occur in
childhood for ASD.’’
Not reported ‘‘VR can offer safe, repeatable, and diversifiable interventions that can
benefit assessments and learning in both typically developing children
and children with disabilities. Research has also pointed to VR’s
capacity to reduce children’s experience of aversive stimuli and
reduce anxiety levels.’’
31 studies There is moderate evidence that VR-based treatments can help children
with ASD. The lack of definitive findings does not allow us to state
that VR-based treatments can improve the results of traditional
treatments. Nevertheless, the promising results and the advantages of
VR (especially considering ASD symptomatology) should encourage
the scientific community to develop new VR-based treatments.
26 studies Overall, VR techniques enable the evaluation of pathological eating
behaviors and body image distortions. In addition to CBT, use of VR
techniques by patients with eating disorders decreased their negative
emotional responses to virtual food stimuli or exposure to their body
shape.
NEUROSCIENCE OF VIRTUAL REALITY
Three final articles explored the use of VR in the assess-
ment and treatment of psychosis7 and in pain manage-
ment.6,25 For psychosis, the available studies confirm the
efficacy of VR for the multimodal assessment of cognitive
functioning,7 including social cognition/competence66 and
hallucinations/paranoid ideations.67 For treatment, even if
the available studies are very promising,68–70 there is a lack
of randomized controlled trials demonstrating whether VR is
more efficacious or efficient than other interventions.7
In relation to the use of VR for pain management, older
systematic reviews71,72 demonstrated the efficacy of VR
distraction73–75 for reducing experimental pain,76 as well as
the one generated by burn injury care,77–79 chronic pain,80–82
and procedural pain.83–85 Hence, the first new one6 focused
its analysis on the integrated use of VR with brain stimula-
tion (transcranial direct-current stimulation) in pain man-
agement. Again, even if the level of clinical evidence is still
low, a study86 demonstrated the efficacy of this approach in
reducing the severity of neuropathic pain and various neu-
ropathic pain subtypes. Finally, the second new one,25 sug-
gests that VR may have a role in acutely painful procedures,
even if further research is required.
Overall, this meta-review indicated that VR is a powerful
clinical tool for behavioral health, able to provide effective
assessment and treatment options for a variety of mental
health disorders. Specifically, the 25 meta-analyses and
systematic and narrative reviews indicated that VR compares
favorably to existing treatments in anxiety disorders, eating
and weight disorders, and pain management, with long-term
effects that generalize to the real world. Moreover, they show
the potential of VR as assessment tool with practical appli-
cations that range from social and cognitive deficits to ad-
diction. Finally, they suggest a clinical potential in the
treatment of psychosis and in the pediatric field, even if there
is no definitive evidence for or against the use of VR.
The Effectiveness of VR as a Clinical Tool
An open issue not directly addressed by most of these
articles is why VR is an effective clinical tool. In many
articles, attention is focused on the high level of control and
customization allowed by this technology.1,2,9,10,87 VR al-
lows the level of fit between the content of the exposure and
the feared stimuli to be optimized. Moreover, using it, the
therapist has a total control—limited only by the specific
features of the used software—on the contents of the expe-
rience. Finally, it offers a safer and more private context for
the patient that facilitates his/her engagement.
Another important point suggested by different articles is
the level of ‘‘presence’’ provided by the virtual experience.
In fact, VR provides a digital place to the individual where
he/she can be placed and live a synthetic but realistic expe-
rience.88 As noted by some colleagues, VR can be considered
an advanced imaginal system89,90: an advanced form of
imagery that is as effective as reality in inducing experiences
and emotions. For example, as demonstrated by a recent
meta-analysis, presence and anxiety are associated with each
other during VRE therapy for the treatment of anxiety.91 This
allows a level of self-reflectiveness that is both more pre-
dictable and controllable than the one offered by reality, but
higher than the one provided by memory and imagination.1
However, presence alone is necessary but not sufficient to
7
achieve benefit from VR therapy.92 As noted by Price and
Anderson, ‘‘The results support presence as a conduit that
enabled phobic anxiety to be expressed during exposure to a
virtual environment. However, presence was not supported
as contributing to treatment outcome. This suggests feeling
present during exposure may be necessary but not sufficient
to achieve benefit from VR exposure.’’92(p750)
A new argument that is introduced and discussed in this
article is that VR shares with the brain the same basic
mechanism: embodied simulations.43,93
VR as Simulative Technology
An increasingly popular hypothesis—predictive coding94–96—
suggests that the brain actively maintains an internal model
(simulation) of the body and the space around it, which pro-
vides predictions about the expected sensory input and tries to
minimize the amount of prediction errors (or ‘‘surprise’’). An
in-depth discussion of these concepts is not offered here be-
cause authoritative and thorough accounts have been provided
elsewhere.94–99 However, herein, the focus is on the concept
of simulation introduced by this paradigm to understand better
the links between the brain and VR.
One of the main tenets of predictive coding is that to
regulate and control the body in the world effectively, the
brain creates an embodied simulation of the body in the
world. There are two main characteristics of this simulation.
First, different from other internal models used in cognitive
science—such as Tolman’s cognitive maps or Johhson–
Laird’s internal models—they are simulations of sensory
motor experiences. In this view, they include visceral/auto-
nomic (interoceptive), motor (proprioceptive), and sensory
(e.g., visual, auditory) information. Second, embodied sim-
ulations reactivate multimodal neural networks, which have
produced the simulated/expected effect before.
This approach is used not only for actions, but also for
concepts and emotions. Specifically, a concept is a group of
distributed multimodal ‘‘patterns’’ of activity across differ-
ent populations of neurons (motor, somatosensory, limbic,
and frontal areas) that support a goal achievement.100,101 So,
the simulation of a concept involves its reenactment in
modality-specific brain areas. Moreover, the brain uses
emotion concepts to categorize sensations. As underlined by
Barrett, ‘‘That is, the brain constructs meaning by correctly
anticipating (predicting and adjusting to) incoming sensa-
tions. Sensations are categorized so that they are (a) ac-
tionable in a situated way and therefore (b) meaningful,
based on past experience. When past experiences of emotion
(e.g., happiness) are used to categorize the predicted sensory
array and guide action, then one experiences or perceives
that emotion (happiness).’’100(p9) In this view, the feeling of
presence in a space can be considered as an evolutive tool
used to track the difference between the predicted sensations
and those that are incoming from the sensory world, both
externally and internally.93,102,103
VR works in a similar way: it uses computer technology to
create a simulated world that individuals can manipulate and
explore as if they were in it. In other words, the VR expe-
rience tries to predict the sensory consequences of your
movements, showing to you the same scene you will see in
the real world. Specifically, VR hardware tracks the motion
of the user, while VR software adjusts the images on the
8 RIVA ET AL.
user’s display to reflect the changes produced by the motion
in the virtual world. To achieve it, like the brain, the VR system
maintains a model (simulation) of the body and the space
around it. This prediction is then used to provide the expected
sensory input using the VR hardware. Obviously, to be realistic,
the VR model tries to mimic the brain model as much as
possible: the more the VR model is similar to the brain model,
the more the individual feels present in the VR world.93,104
VR as Embodied Technology
As has just been seen, the brain creates multiple multi-
sensory simulations to predict100: (a) upcoming sensory
events both inside and outside the body, and (b) the best
action to deal with the impending sensory events. Moseley
et al. suggested that these simulations are integrated with
sensory data in the ‘‘body matrix,’’ a coarse supramodal
multisensory representation of the body and the space around
it.105–107 Specifically, the contents of the body matrix are
defined by top-down predictive signals, integrating the
multisensory (motor and visceromotor) simulations of the
causes of perceived sensory events.108 The different simu-
lations are then ranked and included in the body matrix ac-
cording to their relevance for the intentions of the self
(selective attention). At the same time, the content and the
priority of the different simulations are corrected by bottom-
up prediction errors that signal mismatches between pre-
dicted and actual contents of sensory events.109
At the end of this process, the body matrix defines where
the self is present, that is, in the body that our brain considers
as the most likely to be its one.110–112 As underlined by Apps
and Tsakiris, ‘‘The mental representation of the physical
properties of one’s self are, therefore, also probabilistic. That
is, one’s own body is the one that has the highest probability
of being ‘me,’ since other objects are probabilistically less
likely to evoke the same sensory inputs. In short, the notion
that there is a ‘self’ is the most parsimonious and accurate
explanation for sensory inputs.’’110(p88)
If presence in the body is the outcome of different em-
bodied simulations, and VR is a simulation technology, this
suggests the possibility of altering the experience of the body
by designing targeted virtual environments.113 In this view,
VR can be defined as an ‘‘embodied technology’’ for its
possibility of modifying the embodiment experience of its
users.114–116 As noted by Riva et al., ‘‘using VR, subjects can
experience the synthetic environment as if it was ‘their sur-
rounding world’ (incarnation: the physical body is within a
virtual environment) or can experience their synthetic ava-
tars as if they were ‘their own body’ (embodiment: the
physical body is replaced by the virtual one).’’1(p9) In other
words, VR is able to fool the predictive coding mechanisms
used by the brain generating the feeling of presence in a
virtual body and in the digital space around it.
Up to now, VR has been used to simulate external reality,
that is, to make people feel ‘‘real’’ what is actually not really
there (i.e., the environment). However, the ability of VR to
fool the predictive coding mechanisms that regulate the ex-
perience of the body also allows it to make people feel
‘‘real’’ what they are not. In other words, VR can offer new
ways for structuring, augmenting, and/or replacing the ex-
perience of the body for clinical goals.114–116 Moreover, it
may offer new embodied ways for assessing the functioning
of the brain117,118 by directly targeting the processes behind
real-world behaviors.119–121
But what is the real clinical potential of VR as an em-
bodied technology? According to neuroscience, the body
matrix105,106,122,123 serves to maintain the integrity of the
body at both the homeostatic and psychological levels by
supervising the cognitive and physiological resources nec-
essary to protect the body and the space around it. Specifically,
the body matrix plays a critical role in high-end cognitive
processes such as motivation, emotion, social cognition, and
self-awareness,124–126 while exerting a top-down modulation
over basic physiological mechanisms such as thermoregula-
tory control127,128 and the immune system.123
In this view, different authors114,116,129,130 have recently
suggested that an altered functioning of the body matrix and/
or its related processes might be the cause of different neu-
rological and psychiatric conditions. If this is true, VR can
be the core of a new trans-disciplinary research field—
embodied medicine115,116—the main goal of which is the use
of advanced technology for altering the body matrix, with the
goal of improving people’s health and well-being.
As has been seen in the first section of this article, two
different VR embodiment techniques—body swapping51,52
and reference frame shifting49,50—are currently used in the
treatment of eating and weight disorders. The first one,
body swapping, replaces the contents of the bodily self-
consciousness with synthetic ones (synthetic embodiment).
This has been used in eating and weight disorders to im-
prove the experience of the body in both clinical (anorexia
and morbid obesity)131,132 and non-clinical subjects.133–135
Nevertheless, the potential of this approach is wider.136 For
example, it may offer a non-pharmacological way to reduce
chronic pain. As has been seen in the first section of this
article, VR distraction is effectively used to reduce acute pain.
Nevertheless, according to Tsay et al., ‘‘available findings
present compelling evidence for a novel multisensory and
multimodal approach to therapies for chronic pain disor-
ders’’137(p249) In this view, the use of VR embodiment may
offer new treatment options for pain management.138–140
Some studies have suggested the possibility of using VR body
swapping to improve body perception disturbance in patients
with complex regional pain syndrome.141,142
The second technique, reference frame shifting, structures
the individual’s bodily self-consciousness through the focus
and reorganization of its contents (mindful embodiment).50,143
It has been successfully used in different randomized trials in
patients with eating and weight disorders54,55 to update the
contents of their body memory. But again, its applications are
probably wider. For example, Osimo et al. integrated body
swapping (in the avatar of Sigmund Freud) and reference
frame shifting to improve mood and happiness in a non-clinical
sample.143
A final emerging approach is the use of VR to augment the
bodily experience through the awareness of internal (and
difficult to sense) bodily information, or the mapping of a
sensory channel to a different one—for example vision to
touch or to hearing (augmented embodiment).144,145 For ex-
ample, Suzuki et al.146 implemented an innovative ‘‘cardiac
rubber hand illusion’’ that combined computer-generated
augmented reality with feedback of interoceptive informa-
tion. Their results showed that the virtual-hand ownership is
enhanced by cardio-visual feedback in time with the actual
NEUROSCIENCE OF VIRTUAL REALITY
heartbeat, supporting the use of this technique to improve
emotion regulation.
VR as Cognitive Technology
VR is an embodied technology for its ability to modify the
experience of the body. However, the body is not simply an
object like any other; it has a special status.93,147,148 It is
perceived in a multisensory way, from the outside (ex-
teroception, the body perceived through the senses) as well
as from within (inner body, including interoception, the
sense of the physiological condition of the body; proprio-
ception, the sense of the position of the body/body segments;
and vestibular input, the sense of motion of the body) and
from memory. This is true also for the simulative code used
by the brain for creating concepts. As has been seen before,
it integrates visceral/autonomic (interoceptive), motor (pro-
prioceptive), and sensory information. If concepts are em-
bodied simulations, and VR is an embodied technology, it
should be possible to facilitate cognitive modeling and
change by designing targeted virtual environments able to
modify concepts both from outside and from inside.114
Nevertheless, there is a critical shortcoming that at the
moment is limiting this possibility: VR simulates the exter-
nal world/body but not the internal one. In fact, actual VR
technology is very effective in reproducing the exteroceptive
(external) features of the body using vision and hearing, but
less effective in reproducing the other senses (i.e., touch and
smell149). It is partially effective in reproducing the propri-
oceptive (motor) features of the body using haptic technol-
ogies,150 but it is not yet able to reproduce the interoceptive/
vestibular (internal) features of the body.
Recently, Riva et al.116 introduced the concept of ‘‘sono-
ception,’’ a novel noninvasive technological paradigm based
on wearable acoustic and vibrotactile transducers, as a pos-
sible approach to structure, augment, and/or replace the
contents of the inner body. This approach should be able to
modulate the inner body (interoception, proprioception, and
vestibular input) through the stimulation of both mechano-
receptors in different parts of the body—the stomach, the
heart, the muscles—and the otolith organs of the vestibular
system (see Fig. 2).
9
The first outcome of an integrated VR platform able to
simulate both the external and the inner world is the possi-
bility of structuring, augmenting, and/or replacing all the
different experiential aspects of bodily self-consciousness,
with clinical applications in the treatment of psychiatric
disorders, such as depression151,152 or schizophrenia,153–155
and neurological disorders, such as chronic pain137,156 and
neglect.157,158
The final long-term outcome of this possibility may be the
embodied virtual training machine described by the science-
fiction thriller The Matrix. In this movie, the heroes, Trinity
and Neo, learned how to fight martial-arts battles and drive
motorcycles and helicopters by experiencing the bodily pro-
cesses and concepts related to the skill through an embodied
simulation.
Conclusions
The first article discussing a VR application in the field of
behavioral health was published in 1995.159 Now, more than
20 years later, VR is a reality in this field. This is the result of
a meta-review presented in this article assessing the meta-
analyses and systematic and narrative reviews published in
this field in the last 22 months. Twenty-five different articles
have demonstrated the clinical potential of this technology in
both the diagnosis and the treatment of mental health dis-
orders. Specifically, they indicate that VR compares favor-
ably to existing treatments in anxiety disorders, eating and
weight disorders, and pain management, with long-term ef-
fects that generalize to the real world.
But why is VR so effective? Here, the following an-
swer is suggested: VR shares with the brain the same basic
mechanism—embodied simulations.
According to neuroscience, to regulate and control the
body in the world effectively, the brain creates an embodied
simulation of the body in the world used to represent and
predict actions, concepts, and emotions. Specifically, it is
used to predict: (a) upcoming sensory events both inside and
outside the body, and (b) the best action to deal with the
impending sensory events.100 There are two main charac-
teristics of this simulation. First, it simulates sensory motor
experiences, including visceral/autonomic (interoceptive),
FIG. 2. The technology of
‘‘sonoception.’’
10
motor (proprioceptive), and sensory (e.g., visual, auditory)
information. Second, embodied simulations reactivate mul-
timodal neural networks which have produced the simulated/
expected effect before.
VR works in a similar way: the VR experience tries to
predict the sensory consequences of the individual’s move-
ments, providing to him/her the same scene he/she will see in
the real world. To achieve this, the VR system, like the brain,
maintains a model (simulation) of the body and the space
around it.
If presence in the body is the outcome of different em-
bodied simulations, and VR is a simulation technology, this
suggests the possibility of altering the experience of the
body by designing targeted virtual environments.113 In this
view, VR can be defined as an ‘‘embodied technology’’ for
its possibility of modifying the embodiment experience of
its users.114–116 In other words, VR is able to fool the pre-
dictive coding mechanisms used by the brain, generating the
feeling of presence in a virtual body and in the digital space
around it.
Moreover, if concepts are embodied simulations, and VR
is an embodied technology, it should be possible to facilitate
cognitive modeling and change by designing targeted virtual
environments able to modify concepts from both outside and
inside.114
Nevertheless, at the moment, there is a critical shortcoming
that is limiting this possibility: VR simulates the external
world/body but not the internal one. Recently, Riva et al.116
introduced the concept of ‘‘sonoception’’ (www.sonoception.
com), a novel noninvasive technological paradigm based on
wearable acoustic and vibrotactile transducers able to stim-
ulate both mechanoreceptors in different parts of the body—
the stomach, the heart, the muscles—and the otolith organs of
the vestibular system (see Fig. 2). The first outcome of this
approach is the development of an interoceptive stimulator
that is both able to assess interoceptive time perception in
clinical patients160 and to enhance heart rate variability (the
short-term vagally mediated component—rMSSD) through
the modulation of the subjects’ parasympathetic system.161
The integration of these technologies with VR in a multi-
sensory simulative platform will allow the modulation of both
the external and internal bodily information, to structure,
augment and/or replace the contents of our bodily self-
consciousness.
In conclusion, even if VR is already a reality in behavioral
health, the possibility of using it to simulate both the external
and internal world may open new clinical options in the near
future able to target the experience of the body and its related
processes directly. Psychosomatics is an interdisciplinary field
that explores the relationships between psychosocial, behavioral
factors, and bodily processes. The long-term goal of the vision
presented in this article is the use of simulative technologies—
both simulating the external world and the internal one—to
reverse engineer the psychosomatic processes that connect
mind and body. If achieved, this perspective will provide a
radically new meaning to the classical Juvenal’s Latin dictum
‘‘Mens sana in corpore sano’’ (a healthy mind in a healthy
body) by allowing a new trans-disciplinary research field—
‘‘Embodied Medicine’’115,116—that will use advanced multi-
sensory technologies to alter bodily processes for enhancing
homeostasis and well-being.
RIVA ET AL.
Acknowledgments
This article was supported by the Italian MIUR research
project ‘‘Unlocking the memory of the body: Virtual Reality
in Anorexia Nervosa’’ (201597WTTM) and by the Italian
Ministry of Health research project ‘‘High-end and low-end
virtual reality systems for the rehabilitation of frailty in the
elderly’’ (PE-2013-0235594).
Author Disclosure Statement
No competing financial interests exist.
References
1. Riva G, Baños RM, Botella C, et al. Transforming expe-
rience: the potential of augmented reality and virtual re-
ality for enhancing personal and clinical change. Frontiers
in Psychiatry 2016; 7:164.
2. Freeman D, Reeve S, Robinson A, et al. Virtual reality in
the assessment, understanding, and treatment of mental
health disorders. Psychological Medicine 2017; 47:2393–
2400.
3. Riva G. Letter to the editor: virtual reality in the treatment
of eating and weight disorders. Psychological Medicine
2017; 47:2567–2568.
4. van Bennekom MJ, de Koning PP, Denys D. Virtual re-
ality objectifies the diagnosis of psychiatric disorders: a
literature review. Frontiers in Psychiatry 2017; 8:163.
5. Lindner P, Miloff A, Hamilton W, et al. Creating state of
the art, next-generation virtual reality exposure therapies
for anxiety disorders using consumer hardware platforms:
design considerations and future directions. Cognitive
Behaviour Therapy 2017; 46:404–420.
6. Massetti T, Crocetta TB, Silva TDD, et al. Application
and outcomes of therapy combining transcranial direct
current stimulation and virtual reality: a systematic re-
view. Disability & Rehabilitation: Assistive Technology
2017; 12:551–559.
7. Rus-Calafell M, Garety P, Sason E, et al. Virtual reality in
the assessment and treatment of psychosis: a systematic
review of its utility, acceptability and effectiveness. Psy-
chological Medicine 2017; 48:362–391.
8. Botella C, Fernández-Álvarez J, Guillén V, et al. Recent
progress in virtual reality exposure therapy for phobias:
a systematic review. Current Psychiatry Reports 2017; 19:42.
9. Maples-Keller JL, Bunnell BE, Kim SJ, et al. The use of
virtual reality technology in the treatment of anxiety and
other psychiatric disorders. Harvard Review of Psychiatry
2017; 25:103–113.
10. Maples-Keller JL, Yasinski C, Manjin N, et al. Virtual
reality-enhanced extinction of phobias and post-traumatic
stress. Neurotherapeutics 2017; 14:554–563.
11. Cardosx RAI, David OA, David DO. Virtual reality expo-
sure therapy in flight anxiety: a quantitative meta-analysis.
Computers in Human Behavior 2017; 72:371–380.
12. Castelnuovo G, Pietrabissa G, Manzoni GM, et al. Cog-
nitive behavioral therapy to aid weight loss in obese pa-
tients: current perspectives. Psychology Research &
Behavior Management 2017; 10:165–173.
13. Paul L, Van Der Heiden C, Hoek HW. Cognitive behav-
ioral therapy and predictors of weight loss in bariatric
surgery patients. Current Opinion in Psychiatry 2017; 30:
474–479.
NEUROSCIENCE OF VIRTUAL REALITY
14. Dascal J, Reid M, Ishak WW, et al. Virtual reality and
medical inpatients: a systematic review of randomized,
controlled trials. Innovations in Clinical Neuroscience 2017;
14:14–21.
15. Li L, Yu F, Shi D, et al. Application of virtual reality
technology in clinical medicine. American Journal of
Translational Research 2017; 9:3867–3880.
16. Arroll B, Wallace HB, Mount V, et al. A systematic re-
view and meta-analysis of treatments for acrophobia. The
Medical Journal of Australia 2017; 206:263–267.
17. de Carvalho M, Dias T, Duchesne M, et al. Virtual reality
as a promising strategy in the assessment and treatment of
bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder: a systematic
review. Behavioral Sciences 2017; 7:43.
18. Pourmand A, Davis S, Lee D, et al. Emerging utility of
virtual reality as a multidisciplinary tool in clinical med-
icine. Games for Health Journal 2017; 6:263–270.
19. Mishkind MC, Norr AM, Katz AC, et al. Review of virtual
reality treatment in psychiatry: evidence versus current
diffusion and use. Current Psychiatry Reports 2017; 19:80.
20. Duffield TC, Parsons TD, Landry A, et al. Virtual envi-
ronments as an assessment modality with pediatric ASD
populations: a brief report. Child Neuropsychology 2017
Sep 13 [Epub ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1080/09297049
.2017.1375473.
21. Parsons TD, Riva G, Parsons S, et al. Virtual reality in
pediatric psychology. Pediatrics 2017; 140:S86–S91.
22. Jerdan SW, Grindle M, van Woerden HC, Kamel Boulos
MN. Head-mounted virtual reality and mental health:
critical review of current research. JMIR Serious Games
2018; 6:e14.
23. Clus D, Larsen ME, Lemey C, Berrouiguet S. The use of
virtual reality in patients with eating disorders: systematic
review. Journal of Medical Internet Research 2018; 20:e157.
24. Mesa-Gresa P, Gil-Gomez H, Lozano-Quilis JA, Gil-
Gomez JA. Effectiveness of virtual reality for children and
adolescents with autism spectrum disorder: an evidence-
based systematic review. Sensors 2018; 18:pii:E2486.
25. Chan E, Foster S, Sambell R, Leong P. Clinical efficacy of
virtual reality for acute procedural pain management: a
systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One 2018; 13:
e0200987.
26. Rothbaum BO, Rizzo AS, Difede J. Virtual reality expo-
sure therapy for combat-related posttraumatic stress dis-
order. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 2010;
1208:126–132.
27. Wiederhold BK, Wiederhold MD. Three-year follow-up
for virtual reality exposure for fear of flying. CyberPsy-
chology & Behavior 2003; 6:441–445.
28. McLay RN, Wood DP, Webb-Murphy JA, et al. A ran-
domized, controlled trial of virtual reality-graded expo-
sure therapy for post-traumatic stress disorder in active
duty service members with combat-related post-traumatic
stress disorder. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social
Networking 2011; 14:223–239.
29. Repetto C, Gorini A, Vigna C, et al. The use of biofeed-
back in clinical virtual reality: the INTREPID project.
Journal of Visualized Experiments 2009 Nov 12 [Epub
ahead of print]; DOI: 10.3791/1554.
30. Wiederhold BK, Wiederhold MD. Clinical observations
during virtual reality therapy for specific phobias. Cy-
berPsychology & Behavior 1999; 2:161–168.
31. Rothbaum BO, Hodges L, Smith S, et al. A controlled
study of virtual reality exposure therapy for the fear of
11
flying. Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology 2000;
68:1020–1026.
32. Parsons TD, Rizzo AA. Affective outcomes of virtual
reality exposure therapy for anxiety and specific phobias:
a meta-analysis. Journal of Behavior Therapy & Experi-
mental Psychiatry 2008; 39:250–261.
33. Goncalves R, Pedrozo AL, Coutinho ES, et al. Efficacy of
virtual reality exposure therapy in the treatment of PTSD:
a systematic review. PLoS One 2012; 7:e48469.
34. Botella C, Garcı̀a-Palacios A, Villa H, et al. Virtual reality
exposure in the treatment of panic disorder and agora-
phobia: a controlled study. Clinical Psychology & Psy-
chotherapy 2007; 14:164–175.
35. Anderson PL, Price M, Edwards SM, et al. Virtual reality
exposure therapy for social anxiety disorder: a random-
ized controlled trial. Journal of Consulting & Clinical
Psychology 2013; 81:751–760.
36. Gaggioli A, Pallavicini F, Morganti L, et al. Experiential
virtual scenarios with real-time monitoring (interreality)
for the management of psychological stress: a block ran-
domized controlled trial. Journal of Medical Internet Re-
search 2014; 16:e167.
37. Repetto C, Gaggioli A, Pallavicini F, et al. Virtual reality
and mobile phones in the treatment of generalized anxiety
disorders: a Phase-2 clinical trial. Personal & Ubiquitous
Computing 2013; 17:253–260.
38. Wiederhold BK, Riva G, Gutierrez-Maldonado J. Virtual
reality in the assessment and treatment of weight-related
disorders. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Net-
working 2016; 19:67–73.
39. Pla-Sanjuanelo J, Ferrer-Garcı́a M, Vilalta-Abella F, et al.
Testing virtual reality-based cue-exposure software: which
cue-elicited responses best discriminate between patients
with eating disorders and healthy controls? Eating and
Weight Disorders 2017 Jul 27 [Epub ahead of print]; DOI:
10.1007/s40519-017-0419-4.
40. Ferrer-Garcia M, Gutierrez-Maldonado J, Pla-Sanjuanelo
J, et al. A randomised controlled comparison of second-
level treatment approaches for treatment-resistant adults
with bulimia nervosa and binge eating disorder: assessing
the benefits of virtual reality cue exposure therapy. Eu-
ropean Eating Disorders Review 2017; 25:479–490.
41. Riva G. Modifications of body image induced by virtual
reality. Perceptual & Motor Skills 1998; 86:163–170.
42. Riva G, Bacchetta M, Baruffi M, et al. Virtual reality-based
experiential cognitive treatment of obesity and binge-eating
disorders. Clinical Psychology & Psychotherapy 2000; 7:
209–219.
43. Riva G, Gaudio S. Locked to a wrong body: eating dis-
orders as the outcome of a primary disturbance in multi-
sensory body integration. Consciousness & Cognition
2018; 59:57–59.
44. Riva G, Gaudio S, Dakanalis A. The neuropsychology of
self objectification. European Psychologist 2015; 20:34–43.
45. Riva G. Out of my real body: cognitive neuroscience
meets eating disorders. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience
2014; 8:236.
46. Riva G. Neuroscience and eating disorders: the allocentric
lock hypothesis. Medical Hypotheses 2012; 78:254–257.
47. Serino S, Dakanalis A, Gaudio S, et al. Out of body, out of
space: impaired reference frame processing in eating
disorders. Psychiatry Research 2015; 230:732–734.
48. Riva G, Dakanalis A. Altered processing and integration
of multisensory bodily representations and signals in
12
eating disorders: a possible path toward the understanding
of their underlying causes. Frontiers in Human Neu-
roscience 2018; 12:49.
49. Akhtar S, Justice LV, Loveday C, et al. Switching memory
perspective. Consciousness & Cognition 2017; 56:50–57.
50. Riva G. The key to unlocking the virtual body: virtual re-
ality in the treatment of obesity and eating disorders. Journal
of Diabetes Science & Technology 2011; 5:283–292.
51. Normand JM, Giannopoulos E, Spanlang B, et al. Multi-
sensory stimulation can induce an illusion of larger belly
size in immersive virtual reality. Plos One 2011; 6:e16128.
52. Gutiérrez-Maldonado J, Wiederhold BK, Riva G. Future
directions: how virtual reality can further improve the
assessment and treatment of eating disorders and obesity.
Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2016;
19:148–153.
53. Marco JH, Perpina C, Botella C. Effectiveness of cogni-
tive behavioral therapy supported by virtual reality in the
treatment of body image in eating disorders: one year
follow-up. Psychiatry Research 2013; 209:619–625.
54. Manzoni GM, Cesa GL, Bacchetta M, et al. Virtual
reality-enhanced cognitive–behavioral therapy for morbid
obesity: a randomized controlled study with 1 year follow-
up. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2016;
19:134–140.
55. Cesa GL, Manzoni GM, Bacchetta M, et al. Virtual reality
for enhancing the cognitive behavioral treatment of obe-
sity with binge eating disorder: randomized controlled
study with one-year follow-up. Journal of Medical Inter-
net Research 2013; 15:e113.
56. Marta F-G, Joana P-S, Antonios D, et al. A randomized
trial of virtual reality-based cue exposure second-level
therapy and cognitive behavior second-level therapy for
bulimia nervosa and binge-eating disorder: outcome at
six-month followup. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social
Networking 2018 July 30 [Epub ahead of print]; DOI:
10.1089/cyber.2017.0675.
57. Parsons S. Authenticity in virtual reality for assessment
and intervention in autism: a conceptual review. Educa-
tional Research Review 2016; 19:138–157.
58. Negut A, Jurma AM, David D. Virtual-reality-based at-
tention assessment of ADHD: ClinicaVR: classroom-CPT
versus a traditional continuous performance test. Child
Neuropsychology 2017; 23:692–712.
59. Pollak Y, Weiss PL, Rizzo AA, et al. The utility of a
continuous performance test embedded in virtual reality in
measuring ADHD-related deficits. Journal of Develop-
mental & Behavioral Pediatrics 2009; 30:2–6.
60. Hone-Blanchet A, Wensing T, Fecteau S. The use of
virtual reality in craving assessment and cue-exposure
therapy in substance use disorders. Frontiers in Human
Neuroscience 2014; 8:844.
61. Bordnick PS, Graap KM, Copp HL, et al. Virtual reality
cue reactivity assessment in cigarette smokers. CyberP-
sychology & Behavior 2005; 8:487–492.
62. Lee J, Lim Y, Graham SJ, et al. Nicotine craving and cue
exposure therapy by using virtual environments. CyberP-
sychology & Behavior 2004; 7:705–713.
63. Bordnick PS, Traylor A, Copp HL, et al. Assessing re-
activity to virtual reality alcohol based cues. Addictive
Behaviors 2008; 33:743–756.
64. Ledoux T, Nguyen AS, Bakos-Block C, et al. Using vir-
tual reality to study food cravings. Appetite 2013; 71:396–
402.
RIVA ET AL.
65. Saladin ME, Brady KT, Graap K, et al. A preliminary
report on the use of virtual reality technology to elicit
craving and cue reactivity in cocaine dependent individ-
uals. Addictive Behaviors 2006; 31:1881–1894.
66. Gutiérrez-Maldonado J, Rus-Calafell M, Marquez-Rejón
S, et al. Associations between facial emotion recognition,
cognition and alexithymia in patients with schizophrenia:
comparison of photographic and virtual reality presenta-
tions. Studies in Health Technology & Informatics 2012;
181:88–92.
67. Stinson K, Valmaggia LR, Antley A, et al. Cognitive
triggers of auditory hallucinations: an experimental in-
vestigation. Journal of Behavioral Therapy & Experi-
mental Psychiatry 2010; 41:179–184.
68. Freeman D, Bradley J, Antley A, et al. Virtual reality in the
treatment of persecutory delusions: randomised controlled
experimental study testing how to reduce delusional con-
viction. British Journal of Psychiatry 2016; 209:62–67.
69. Gega L, White R, Clarke T, et al. Virtual environments
using video capture for social phobia with psychosis.
Cyberpsychogy, Behavior, & Social Networking 2013; 16:
473–479.
70. Leff J, Williams G, Huckvale MA, et al. Computer-
assisted therapy for medication-resistant auditory hallu-
cinations: proof-of-concept study. British Journal of Psy-
chiatry 2013; 202:428–433.
71. Malloy KM, Milling LS. The effectiveness of virtual re-
ality distraction for pain reduction: a systematic review.
Clinical Psychology Review 2010; 30:1011–1018.
72. Morris LD, Louw QA, Grimmer-Somers K. The effec-
tiveness of virtual reality on reducing pain and anxiety in
burn injury patients: a systematic review. The Clinical
Journal of Pain 2009; 25:815–826.
73. Wiederhold BK, Soomro A, Riva G, et al. Future direc-
tions: advances and implications of virtual environments
designed for pain management. Cyberpsychology, Beha-
vior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:414–422.
74. Sulea C, Soomro A, Boyd C, et al. Pain management in
virtual reality: a comprehensive research chart. Cyberpsy-
chology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:402–413.
75. Li A, Montano Z, Chen VJ, et al. Virtual reality and pain
management: current trends and future directions. Pain
Management 2011; 1:147–157.
76. Keefe FJ, Huling DA, Coggins MJ, et al. Virtual reality
for persistent pain: a new direction for behavioral pain
management. Pain 2012; 153:2163–2166.
77. Schmitt YS, Hoffman HG, Blough DK, et al. A random-
ized, controlled trial of immersive virtual reality analgesia,
during physical therapy for pediatric burns. Burns 2011;
37:61–68.
78. Hoffman HG, Richards TL, Coda B, et al. Modulation of
thermal pain-related brain activity with virtual reality:
evidence from fMRI. Neuroreport 2004; 15:1245–1248.
79. Hoffman HG, Richards TL, Van Oostrom T, et al. The
analgesic effects of opioids and immersive virtual reality
distraction: evidence from subjective and functional brain
imaging assessments. Anesthesia & Analgesia 2007; 105:
1776–1783, table of contents.
80. Wiederhold BK, Gao K, Sulea C, et al. Virtual reality as a
distraction technique in chronic pain patients. Cyberpsy-
chology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:346–
352.
81. Parsons TD, Trost Z. (2014) Virtual reality graded expo-
sure therapy as treatment for pain-related fear and
NEUROSCIENCE OF VIRTUAL REALITY
disability in chronic pain. In Ma M, Jain L, Anderson P,
eds. Virtual, augmented reality and serious games for
healthcare 1. Intelligent Systems Reference Library, vol.
68. Berlin: Springer, pp. 523–546.
82. Jin W, Choo A, Gromala D, et al. A virtual reality game
for chronic pain management: a randomized, controlled
clinical study. Studies in Health Technology & Infor-
matics 2016; 220:154–160.
83. Hua Y, Qiu R, Yao WY, et al. The effect of virtual reality
distraction on pain relief during dressing changes in
children with chronic wounds on lower limbs. Pain
Management Nursing 2015; 16:685–691.
84. Wiederhold MD, Gao K, Wiederhold BK. Clinical use of
virtual reality distraction system to reduce anxiety and
pain in dental procedures. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, &
Social Networking 2014; 17:359–365.
85. Mosso-Vazquez JL, Gao K, Wiederhold BK, et al. Virtual
reality for pain management in cardiac surgery. Cyberp-
sychology, Behavior, & Social Networking 2014; 17:371–
378.
86. Soler MD, Kumru H, Pelayo R, et al. Effectiveness of
transcranial direct current stimulation and visual illusion
on neuropathic pain in spinal cord injury. Brain 2010; 133:
2565–2577.
87. Pallavicini F, Ferrari A, Zini A, et al. (2017) What dis-
tinguishes a traditional gaming experience from one in
virtual reality? An exploratory study. In Ahram T, Falcão
C, eds. Advances in human factors in wearable technol-
ogies and game design. Cham, Switzerland: Springer,
pp. 225–231.
88. Riva G, Botella C, Baños R, et al. (2015) Presence-
inducing media for mental health applications. In Lombard
M, Biocca F, Freeman J, et al., eds. Immersed in media.
New York: Springer, pp. 283–332.
89. Vincelli F, Riva G. Virtual reality as a new imaginative
tool in psychotherapy. Studies in Health Technology &
Informatics 2000; 70:356–358.
90. Riva G, Molinari E, Vincelli F. Interaction and presence in
the clinical relationship: virtual reality (VR) as commu-
nicative medium between patient and therapist. IEEE
Transactions on Information Technology in Biomedicine
2002; 6:198–205.
91. Ling Y, Nefs HT, Morina N, et al. A meta-analysis on the
relationship between self-reported presence and anxiety in
virtual reality exposure therapy for anxiety disorders.
PLoS One 2014; 9:e96144.
92. Price M, Anderson P. The role of presence in virtual re-
ality exposure therapy. Journal of Anxiety Disorders 2007;
21:742–751.
93. Riva G. The neuroscience of body memory: from the self
through the space to the others. Cortex 2017 Jul 25 [Epub
ahead of print]; DOI: 10.1016/j.cortex.2017.07.013.
94. Friston K. The free-energy principle: a unified brain the-
ory? Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2010; 11:127–138.
95. Friston K. Embodied inference and spatial cognition.
Cognitive Processing 2012; 13:S171–177.
96. Clark A. Whatever next? Predictive brains, situated
agents, and the future of cognitive science. Behavioral &
Brain Sciences 2013; 36:181–204.
97. Talsma D. Predictive coding and multisensory integration:
an attentional account of the multisensory mind. Frontiers
in Integrative Neuroscience 2015; 9:19.
98. Hohwy J. (2013) The predictive mind. Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
13
99. Clark A. (2016) Surfing uncertainty: prediction, ac-
tion, and the embodied mind. Oxford: Oxford University
Press.
100. Barrett LF. The theory of constructed emotion: an active
inference account of interoception and categorization.
Social Cognitive & Affective Neuroscience 2017; 12:1–
23.
101. Barsalou LW. Situated simulation in the human concep-
tual system. Language & Cognitive Processes 2003; 18:
513–562.
102. Riva G, Waterworth JA, Waterworth EL, et al. From in-
tention to action: the role of presence. New Ideas in
Psychology 2011; 29:24–37.
103. Riva G, Mantovani F. From the body to the tools and
back: a general framework for presence in mediated in-
teractions. Interacting with Computers 2012; 24:203–210.
104. Sanchez-Vives MV, Slater M. From presence to con-
sciousness through virtual reality. Nature Reviews Neuro-
science 2005; 6:332–339.
105. Moseley GL, Gallace A, Spence C. Bodily illusions in
health and disease: physiological and clinical perspectives
and the concept of a cortical ‘‘body matrix.’’ Neuro-
science & Biobehavioral Reviews 2012; 36:34–46.
106. Gallace A, Spence C. (2014) In touch with the future: the
sense of touch from cognitive neuroscience to virtual re-
ality. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
107. Sedda A, Tonin D, Salvato G, et al. Left caloric vestibular
stimulation as a tool to reveal implicit and explicit pa-
rameters of body representation. Consciousness & Cog-
nition 2016; 41:1–9.
108. Friston K, Daunizeau J, Kilner J, et al. Action and be-
havior: a free-energy formulation. Biological Cybernetics
2010; 102:227–260.
109. Friston K. The free-energy principle: a rough guide to the
brain? Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2009; 13:293–301.
110. Apps MA, Tsakiris M. The free-energy self: a predictive
coding account of self-recognition. Neuroscience & Bio-
behavioral Reviews 2014; 41:85–97.
111. Holmes NP, Spence C. The body schema and the multi-
sensory representation(s) of peripersonal space. Cognitive
Processing 2004; 5:94–105.
112. Serino S, Scarpina F, Dakanalis A, et al. The role of age
on multisensory bodily experience: an experimental study
with a virtual reality full-body illusion. Cyberpsychology,
Behavior, & Social Networking 2018; 21:304–310.
113. Oliveira ECD, Bertrand P, Lesur MER, et al. Virtual body
swap: a new feasible tool to be explored in health and
education. In 2016 XVIII Symposium on Virtual and
Augmented Reality (SVR 2016). New York: Institute of
Electrical and Electronics Engineers, pp. 81–89.
114. Riva G. From virtual to real body: virtual reality as em-
bodied technology. Journal of Cybertherapy & Re-
habiliation 2008; 1:7–22.
115. Riva G. (2016) Embodied medicine: what human com-
puter confluence can offer to health care. In Gaggioli A,
Ferscha A, Riva G, et al., eds. Human computer conflu-
ence: transforming human experience through symbi-
otic technologies. Warsaw, Poland: De Gruyter Open,
pp. 55–79.
116. Riva G, Serino S, Di Lernia D, et al. Embodied medicine:
mens sana in corpore virtuale sano. Frontiers in Human
Neuroscience 2017; 11:120.
117. Parsons TD. Virtual reality for enhanced ecological validity
and experimental control in the clinical, affective and social
14
neurosciences. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2015; 9:
660.
118. Parsons T, Gaggioli A, Riva G. Virtual reality for research
in social neuroscience. Brain Sciences 2017; 7:42.
119. Serino S, Baglio F, Rossetto F, et al. Picture Interpretation
Test (PIT) 360: an innovative measure of executive
functions. Scientific Reports 2017; 7:16000.
120. Cipresso P. Modeling behavior dynamics using compu-
tational psychometrics within virtual worlds. Frontiers in
Psychology 2015; 6:1725.
121. Cipresso P, Serino S, Riva G. Psychometric assessment
and behavioral experiments using a free virtual reality
platform and computational science. BMC Medical In-
formatics & Decision Making 2016; 16:37.
122. Finotti G, Migliorati D, Costantini M. Multisensory inte-
gration, bodily self-consciousness and disorders of the im-
mune system. Brain, Behavior, & Immunity 2015; 49:e31.
123. Finotti G, Costantini M. Multisensory body representation
in autoimmune diseases. Scientific Reports 2016; 6:21074.
124. Tsakiris M. The multisensory basis of the self: from body
to identity to others. Quarterly Journal of Experimental
Psychology 2017; 70:597–609.
125. Maister L, Slater M, Sanchez-Vives MV, et al. Changing
bodies changes minds: owning another body affects social
cognition. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 2015; 19:6–12.
126. Maister L, Sebanz N, Knoblich G, et al. Experiencing
ownership over a dark-skinned body reduces implicit ra-
cial bias. Cognition 2013; 128:170–178.
127. Macauda G, Bertolini G, Palla A, et al. Binding body and
self in visuo-vestibular conflicts. European Journal of
Neuroscience 2015; 41:810–817.
128. Gallace A, Soravia G, Cattaneo Z, et al. Temporary inter-
ference over the posterior parietal cortices disrupts ther-
moregulatory control in humans. PLoS One 2014; 9:e88209.
129. Brugger P, Lenggenhager B. The bodily self and its dis-
orders: neurological, psychological and social aspects.
Current Opinion in Neurology 2014; 27:644–652.
130. Tsakiris M, Critchley H. Interoception beyond homeo-
stasis: affect, cognition and mental health. Philosophical
Transactions of the Royal Society B 2016; 371.
131. Keizer A, van Elburg A, Helms R, et al. A virtual reality
full body illusion improves body image disturbance in
anorexia nervosa. PLoS One 2016; 11:e0163921.
132. Serino S, Scarpina F, Keizer A, et al. A novel technique
for improving bodily experience in a non-operable
super-super obesity case. Frontiers in Psychology 2016;
7:837.
133. Serino S, Pedroli E, Keizer A, et al. Virtual reality body
swapping: a tool for modifying the allocentric memory of
the body. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & Social Net-
working 2016; 19:127–133.
134. Preston C, Ehrsson HH. Illusory changes in body size
modulate body satisfaction in a way that is related to non-
clinical eating disorder psychopathology. Plos One 2014;
9:e85773.
135. Preston C, Ehrsson HH. Illusory obesity triggers body
dissatisfaction responses in the insula and anterior cin-
gulate cortex. Cerebral Cortex 2016; 26:4450–4460.
136. Serino S, Dakanalis A. Bodily illusions and weight-related
disorders: clinical insights from experimental research.
Annals of Physical & Rehabilitation Medicine 2017; 60:
217–219.
137. Tsay A, Allen TJ, Proske U, et al. Sensing the body in
chronic pain: a review of psychophysical studies impli-
RIVA ET AL.
cating altered body representation. Neuroscience & Bio-
behavioral Reviews 2015; 52:221–232.
138. Romano D, Llobera J, Blanke O. Size and viewpoint of an
embodied virtual body impact the processing of painful
stimuli. Journal of Pain 2016; 17:350–358.
139. Pazzaglia M, Haggard P, Scivoletto G, et al. Pain and
somatic sensation are transiently normalized by illusory
body ownership in a patient with spinal cord injury. Re-
storative Neurology & Neuroscience 2016; 34:603–613.
140. Sarig Bahat H, Takasaki H, Chen XQ, et al. Cervical ki-
nematic training with and without interactive VR training
for chronic neck pain—a randomized clinical trial. Man-
ual Therapy 2015; 20:68–78.
141. Hwang H, Cho S, Lee JH. The effect of virtual body
swapping with mental rehearsal on pain intensity and body
perception disturbance in complex regional pain syndrome.
International Journal of Rehabilitation Research 2014; 37:
167–172.
142. Jeon B, Cho S, Lee JH. Application of virtual body
swapping to patients with complex regional pain syn-
drome: a pilot study. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, & So-
cial Networking 2014; 17:366–370.
143. Osimo SA, Pizarro R, Spanlang B, et al. Conversations
between self and self as Sigmund Freud—a virtual body
ownership paradigm for self counselling. Scientific Re-
ports 2015; 5.
144. Waterworth JA, Waterworth EL. (2014) Altered, ex-
panded and distributed embodiment: the three stages of
interactive presence. In Riva G, Waterworth JA, Murray
D, eds. Interacting with presence: HCI and the sense of
presence in computer-mediated environments. Berlin: De
Gruyter Open, pp. 36–50.
145. Duquette P. Increasing our insular world view: interocep-
tion and psychopathology for psychotherapists. Frontiers
in Neuroscience 2017; 11:135.
146. Suzuki K, Garfinkel SN, Critchley HD, et al. Multisensory
integration across exteroceptive and interoceptive do-
mains modulates self-experience in the rubber-hand illu-
sion. Neuropsychologia 2013; 51:2909–2917.
147. Aspell JE, Lenggenhager B, Blanke O. (2012) Multi-
sensory perception and bodily self-consciousness. From
out-of-body to inside-body experience. In Murray MM,
Wallace MT, eds. The neural bases of multisensory pro-
cesses. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, ch. 24.
148. Blanke O. Multisensory brain mechanisms of bodily self-
consciousness. Nature Reviews Neuroscience 2012; 13:
556–571.
149. Serrano B, Baños RM, Botella C. Virtual reality and
stimulation of touch and smell for inducing relaxation: a
randomized controlled trial. Computers in Human Beha-
vior 2016; 55:1–8.
150. Adams RJ, Hannaford B. Control law design for haptic
interfaces to virtual reality. IEEE Transactions on Control
Systems Technology 2002; 10:3–13.
151. Barrett LF, Quigley KS, Hamilton P. An active inference
theory of allostasis and interoception in depression. Phi-
losophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 2016; 371.
152. Wheatley J, Brewin CR, Patel T, et al. I’ll believe it when
I can see it: imagery rescripting of intrusive sensory
memories in depression. Journal of Behavior Therapy &
Experimental Psychiatry 2007; 38:371–385.
153. Postmes L, Sno HN, Goedhart S, et al. Schizophrenia as a
self-disorder due to perceptual incoherence. Schizophrenia
Research 2014; 152:41–50.
NEUROSCIENCE OF VIRTUAL REALITY
154. Ferri F, Costantini M, Salone A, et al. Upcoming tactile
events and body ownership in schizophrenia. Schizo-
phrenia Research 2014; 152:51–57.
155. Klaver M, Dijkerman HC. Bodily experience in schizo-
phrenia: factors underlying a disturbed sense of body own-
ership. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2016; 10:305.
156. Di Lernia D, Serino S, Riva G. Pain in the body. Altered
interoception in chronic pain conditions: A systematic
review. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews 2016; 71:
328–341.
157. Bolognini N, Convento S, Casati C, et al. Multisensory
integration in hemianopia and unilateral spatial neglect:
evidence from the sound induced flash illusion. Neu-
ropsychologia 2016; 87:134–143.
158. Lenggenhager B, Loetscher T, Kavan N, et al. Paradoxical
extension into the contralesional hemispace in spatial
neglect. Cortex 2012; 48:1320–1328.
159. Rothbaum BO, Hodges LF, Kooper R, et al. Effectiveness
of computer-generated (virtual reality) graded exposure in
the treatment of acrophobia. American Journal of Psy-
chiatry 1995; 152:626–628.
15
160. Di Lernia D, Serino S, Pezzulo G, et al. Feel the time.
Time perception as a function of interoceptive processing.
Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 2018; 12:74.
161. Di Lernia D, Cipresso P, Pedroli E, Riva G. Toward an
embodied medicine: a portable device with programmable
interoceptive stimulation for heart rate variability en-
hancement. Sensors 2018; 18:pii:E2469.
162. Uman LS. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Journal
of the Canadian Academy of Child & Adolescent Psy-
chiatry 2011; 20:57–59.
Address correspondence to:
Prof. Giuseppe Riva
Department of Psychology
Università Cattolica del Sacro Cuore
Largo Gemelli 1
20123, Milan
Italy
E-mail: giuseppe.riva@unicatt.it